• December 4, 2014 at 4:15 pm #64514

    If you have used any of the following TPMS tools, please rate it on a scale of 1-10 (10 being the best). Please add model numbers if appropriate.

    _____ATEQ
    _____Autel
    _____BarTec
    _____EEZTire
    _____Kent Moore
    _____OTC
    _____Schrader
    _____Standard
    _____Tech500
    _____TechSmart

    Additional comments welcome.

    AutomotiveManagementNetwork.com
    [email protected]
    616-340-2380

    December 5, 2014 at 8:32 am #73801
    Tom Ham
    Participant

    Gary, we had a chance to demo an Autel yesterday. How is the ATEQ different? What else does it do, etc.?

    Thanks,
    Tom

    Tom - Shop Owner since 1978

    December 8, 2014 at 12:37 pm #73803
    chogan
    Member

    If you have used any of the following TPMS tools, please rate it on a scale of 1-10 (10 being the best). Please add model numbers if appropriate.

    _____ATEQ
    _____Autel
    __X___BarTec
    _____EEZTire
    _____Kent Moore
    _____OTC
    _____Schrader
    _____Standard
    _____Tech500
    _____TechSmart
     We have used the BarTec 400SD for 2 years now and our technicians love this tool!

    December 16, 2014 at 8:47 pm #73812
    Guido
    Member

    Hi Tom:

    I’m not the huckster from FL (The only thing missing was the truck and the bell.) but will I do? Before going there, I’d like to address the original thread question. It’s helpful to keep in mind that while the question asked was one thing, the choice of possible responses do not answer the question.

    The short answer? The “best” tool to buy is the one which will do what you need it to do and you will use it consistently. I’ll try to explain. There is a tool available which will monitor the communication between a smart key and the vehicle. If a shop does this kind of work then it may be the greatest thing since zipper-fly. If a shop does not do this type of work then that function is useless.

    At a minimum. a tool needs to be able to write to the module if the vehicle’s module supports this capability. There are just too many vehicles out there requiring it now. It also should have service information incorporated into the tool. Because there still are some vehicles which do things in a different manner. The 7 different Chrysler systems come to mind. Then again, my 2011 Mazda 3 requires you to drive out the reset.

    Having OEM (and aftermarket) replacement part numbers is nice. While not a deal killer for the tool part of it, it is nice for the diagnostics. (Is the wrong sensor installed? More common than you may think.)

    Being able to view/clear DTCs is a nice feature but not a deal killer. Much like part numbers, it’s nice from the diagnostic point of view.

    Tools spout being able to program aftermarket sensors. I won’t speak for anyone else but they don’t blow my skirt up. I’m not overly impressed with the quality of them. (Some unsolicited advice, don’t use them on certain Chrysler systems. I defy you to cost efficiently diagnose the problem if you do.) There really isn’t much money to be saved using them. The only logical reason to use them then is to adhere to “cycle time”. If you can’t get the correct sensor, this will (may) allow you to get the vehicle out the door.

    Number of updates per year should be important. So should ease of updating a tool. Tech support is always high on my list. So is training. You may wonder how much training is there to do for something so simple. I can tell you that I’ll spend between 60-90 minutes with the customers going over the tool. I’ll also tell you that I don’t do business with dolts because I don’t wish to be married to them. So, take it for what it’s worth.

    So to recap, decide what is important for your shop THEN see which tools will do them. A “shoot-out” may appear to be a great idea on paper but is useless and a complete waste of time at best and misleading at worst.

    Now, I wish to make a comment about the guy from FL. I found his response to be a complete commercial. I also found some of what he wrote incorrect and/or misleading. He is flat out wrong on the OEMs world-wide. To the best of my knowledge, the only OEM using this tool is Honda. It’s helpful to keep in mind that there can be any number of reasons that an OEM uses a particular product. Usually though, it comes down to money to/from them.

    Since you asked about Autel, I’ll offer a thought. I don’t distribute this tool. I can’t comment about what it does or doesn’t do well or not. What does get my attention is this:

    http://iknow.stpi.narl.org.tw/Post/Files/complaint/Complaint_pclass_13_A062_Service_Solutions_v._Autel_Intelligent_Technology.pdf

    Then there were these various motions:

    https://www.docketalarm.com/cases/PTAB/IPR2014-00183/Inter_Partes_Review_of_U.S._Pat._6904796/02-10-2014-PM-14682/Notice-15-Order___Motion_for_Pro_Hac_Vice_Admission/

    https://www.docketalarm.com/cases/PTAB/IPR2014-00183/Inter_Partes_Review_of_U.S._Pat._6904796/05-07-2014-PET-1000/Institution_Decision-17-Decision___Institution_of_Inter_Partes_Review/

    https://www.docketalarm.com/cases/PTAB/IPR2014-00183/Inter_Partes_Review_of_U.S._Pat._6904796/06-03-2014-PET-1000/Order-21-Order___re_Initial_Conference_Call_Summary/

    https://www.docketalarm.com/cases/PTAB/IPR2014-00183/Inter_Partes_Review_of_U.S._Pat._6904796/09-05-2014-PM-29228/Notice-34-Order___Conduct_of_the_Proceeding/

    https://www.docketalarm.com/cases/PTAB/IPR2014-00183/Inter_Partes_Review_of_U.S._Pat._6904796/11-12-2014-PM-35165/Opposition-48-Patent_Owners_Response_to_Petitioners_Motion_to_Exclude/

    The long and short? I’d have an issue buying from them, or any other company in their situation, at this point in time.

    HTH,

    Guido

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Topic Tags